Our Friend, The Meter 1672
dbirchall writes "Upon hearing that SpaceShipOne reached 100km today, I did some hasty math based on the altitude in feet sttated by Scaled Composites in their press release, and was surprised to come up with a number under 100,000 meters. Fortunately, a friend pointed out that my inches-to-meters conversion was flawed. Some quick Googling determined that lots of people still have no idea how many inches are in a meter, even after some folks have had big problems because of conversion errors."
meter (Score:5, Funny)
Re:meter (Score:5, Funny)
Re:THIS IS NOT FUNNY 1.0 inch = 2.540000cm (Score:5, Informative)
The US Metric Law of 1866 said that one meter was equal to 39.37 inches, exactly. In 1959, the relationship between inches and centimeters was redefined to be that one inch is equal to 2.54 centimeters, exactly. Maps produced by the US Coast and Geodetic Survey continued to use the old standard. To clarify which foot you are talking about, the old foot, derived from 1 meter = 39.37 inches (exactly), is referred to as the "US survey foot". The new foot, derived from 1 inch = 2.54 cm (exactly), is referred to as the "international foot".
Re:meter (Score:4, Informative)
Jeroen
Re:meter (Score:5, Funny)
And in Chicago, 'meter' is a device that resulted in me having to pay hundreds dollars to park my car.
At least we know. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:At least we know. (Score:5, Funny)
1. it is least not lease
Yes, an American has corrected your spelling.
Perhaps you should learn how to check your writing AND math.
Re:At least we know. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:At least we know. (Score:5, Interesting)
I wish. We've had to deal with everything in inches for years from NASA, now our requirements are a mix. They say we need to detect 1/4" damage from 5 to 7 feet moving at up to 1 meter/min and 1" damage from 7 to 10 feet at up to 3 meters/min. To make matters worse, our scanner measures in millimeters, so we have to convert the spec to mm anyway to know that we can meet the spec. And this is a safety-of-flight program to ensure the shuttle is not damaged.
Why should I care? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Why should I care? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Why should I care? (Score:5, Insightful)
Just because we don't want to, doesn't mean we can't.
We wouldn't have come this far if we weren't a lazy people - that particular trait is the cause of most of our (household) inventions and technological progress.
Having a single, global frame of reference for technical units, which also happens to calculate easily, makes technical development not only faster, but also improves international cooperation.
Sticking to one's own system is just another extra point for one's will for isolationism.
Re:Why should I care? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Why should I care? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Why should I care? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Why should I care? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why should I care? (Score:4, Funny)
(Speaking as someone who thinks in inches despite never having set foot on US soil.)
Re:Why should I care? (Score:4, Insightful)
I suppose you are Yet Another one of my countrymen who thinks that Henry Ford invented the automobile and that it's funny our current leader brags about not reading the news. Ever.
It's people like you who make me ashamed to live here. But For however long it takes people like me will continue to try to better your world for you until you wake up and realize there is nothing great about this country.
If it was "the best place" we'd all have free medicine when we need it, a job, food free from chemicals, food period, less violence in the streets, no racism (which is rampant, from all sides), inexpensive quality housing, both parents (if there are two) in any given family wouldn't have to work (if they can find work) to support their children, we'd actually have cars that live up to emissions standards, it would be safe to eat the fish from our waterways, it would be safe to walk through a city (any city) at night, people would be able to hold police accountable to the same laws they supposedly uphold, we'd stop declairing "war" on abstract concepts ("war on terror" is working about as well as "war on drugs" did), we wouldn't have to filter our water to get rid of the poisons our water treatment plants put in it, we'd never have another case of a high school grad who couldn't read (thousands a year), there'd be nearly free quality higher education for average income people, there'd be less homeless...
I'll stop there for now, but if you ever get tired of just saying it a great place and want to actually help make it a great place, help is needed.
Re:Why should I care? (Score:4, Interesting)
In 1932 John Cockcroft, together with Ernest Walton bombarded Lithium with high energy protons, and succeeded in transmuting it into Helium and other elements.
This was the first occasion on which an atomic nucleus of one element had been successfully changed to a different nucleus by artificial means.
This feat was popularly, if not strictly accurately, known as splitting the atom. Wikipedia.org [wikipedia.org]
On in the US (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe it's the time for the US to join the metric world. At least we wouldn't loose that Mars probe!
Re:On in the US (Score:4, Funny)
Re:On in the US (Score:5, Funny)
As he's apparently British, he can't spell "metre" either.
Re:On in the US (Score:4, Informative)
If over here is Britain, you are wrong. The unit of measurement is spelt "metre" after the French spelling, in just the same way that we (Brits that can spell) use "centre" instead of the American "center".
A "meter" is a measuring device, such as a "water meter" or a "tachometer".
Re:On in the US (Score:5, Funny)
We call it a ruler. Do you call it a yard meter?
Re:On in the US (Score:4, Interesting)
as a tech person, i've always spelled using american spelling. however, my english teacher used to always pick on my use of 'color' instead of 'colour'. he was a typical brit - end of story. not open to accepting the global sense of english.
you can spell it either way, 'color' or 'colour' - and, most people will understand what you mean. its the same with 'ised' vs 'ized' and of course the 're' vs 'er'
btw: for the record, everyone knows that 1in = 2.54cm. 1m = 100/2.54 = 39.37 (accurate to 4dp). there is nothing wrong with the metric system, we all know how to count in base 10. imperial is actually more complex to deal with.
Re:On in the US (Score:3, Insightful)
Next slashdot story:
"English: Lose or Loose? Lose the 'o'! Yes, let it loose!"
erm, or something
Re:On in the US (Score:5, Funny)
Hell no! You'll get my inches, miles, and gallons when you pry them from my cold dead hands!
Loosing the probe was part of the mission design. To bad we lost it afterwards. It really sucks to lose something once you've set it loose.
Re:On in the US (Score:5, Funny)
Shouldn't that be - "You'll get my inches, miles and gallons when you pry them from my cold dead feet!"
Re:On in the US (Score:4, Informative)
google.com:
1 meter = 9.84251969 hands
Re:On in the US (Score:4, Insightful)
If it's something more oddball (like 28 MPG) then it's trickier.
Metric fuel consumption is fuel _consumption_, not _efficiency_, and stated in Liters per 100km.
Thus, it's dead easy to figure out how much you need for a given trip length.
The question of which is more useful would come down to "Do you need to figure out how far you can go on a tank, or how much you need to get there?" I generally know where I'm going, and the distance to that place, so knowing I need X Liters to get there is more useful than "Well, I could manage to go 200 miles."
Re:On in the US (Score:5, Insightful)
So whilst we have "adopted" the metric system we still use the "old" measurements day-to-day.
Re:On in the US (Score:5, Informative)
The "stone" is totally unknown in the US, by the way. I believe that's the only common Imperial (or, as we say, standard) measurement we don't have.
Re:On in the US (Score:5, Informative)
An imperial pint is 20 fluid ounces (a little over half a litre). A US pint is 16 fluid ounces (under half a litre), leading to the factually incorrect US maxim "a pint's a pound the world around". I think there is a small difference in the fluid ounce as well.
Steve
PS 1 stone is 14 pounds.
Re:On in the US (Score:4, Funny)
I have seen pubs selling 1 pound pints before. But they're usually Foster's, which you'd have to pay me to drink.
Re:On in the US (Score:4, Interesting)
Until now you see the results in Germany: Coffee is sold mostly in 500g packets, the usual size of a piece of butter is commonly referred to as "half a pound", and nearly every baker knows what I am talking of if I ask for a "four pound bread". Interestingly the pound is used only for food, and it is only used verbal, no one would ever write it on a piece of paper.
Re:On in the US (Score:5, Interesting)
The net result was a backlash that delayed adoption of the metric system here by decades. Instead of the in-your-face road signs, they should have just quietly started converting smaller things over and let the old system fade away gradually.
We probably will eventually switch over, but this won't happen until after our capability to design or manufacture anything domestically has totally atrophied, and we rely on 100% metric imported goods.
Re:On in the US (Score:5, Interesting)
To metricise speed limits, for instance, pick a long weekend. Over the weekend, replace as many speed signs as you can. (It's a good idea to make sure everyone knows that you're doing this well in advance, of course, and as an interim measure, it's probably a good idea to have 'mph' and 'km/h' on the speed limit signs, but they're long gone by now.)
In general, get everything done as quickly as you can. (Milk bottles were apparently another overnight thing even though at the time you returned them to be refilled.)
Of course, we still have our little remnants. Many people know their height in feet and inches, though the internet seems to exaggerate this. 30 cm rulers are still common, but that's probably more because it's a convenient length, and 40 cm rules exist too. Smallish bottles of drink (fizzy or milk) are 600 mL, the closest round measurement to the imperial pint (but we also have 375 mL cans (of grog or fizzy drinks) and 1.2 L bottles (of fizzy drinks), neither of which are nicely rounded imperial measurements,* so perhaps pre-metrication doesn't hold the answer for that, either).
* A British pint is close enough to 568 mL, which is closer to 600 mL than 500 mL, but two of them is 1.13 L, which is closer to 1.1 L than 2 L, and anyway, 1.1 L is close enough to 1 L that that's probably the better metrication.
Re:On in the US (Score:5, Interesting)
Ever noticed that road signs tend to be placed 1/3 or 2/3 of a mile before an exit?
This isn't just because they like confusing people; 1/3 of a mile is about 1/2 of a kilometer, so this will allow them to switch over to metric without having to move any signs.
Re:On in the US (Score:4, Funny)
It all depends on how cheap the bar is.
We already have (Score:5, Informative)
So really we use a mix of both here. In school they teach almost entirely in metric... makes the math easier to deal with when to have to convert to smaller/larger units. Common stuff like speed limits, weight, tempature, and long distances are measured in mph/pounds/fahrenheit/miles. If you go to the store, or use any tools though it's 50/50.. so smaller units like liters/grams/centimeters I think most people know pretty well.
Re:On in the US (Score:3, Informative)
Good point, but actually tons are a metric unit. One ton is 1000Kg
Re:On in the US (Score:5, Funny)
Usually speled "tonne" to make it clear.
It always bothered me in Star Trek when Spock would be reading off sensors of some object and say "5 million metric tons". Unless you go to 3 significant figures, it doesn't matter which kind of ton(ne); and in the 24th century I rather hope the imperial ton has gone the way of the cubit.
Re:On in the US (Score:5, Interesting)
Here in Canada made the switchover... in my lifetime, even.
I had just barely started school when I first heard that that Canada would be moving to the metric system. At the time, there were fewer than 10 countries worldwide that did not yet use the metric system.
Today, the USA alone bears the distinction of being the only nation on the planet that has not yet made any sort of government sponsored effort to switch to the metric system. I find this slightly amusing personally.
The conversion didn't happen overnight in Canada, and in many situations, people still use the imperial measurements. The signage has all been changed, of course... but a lot of people still think in imperial units, so they still get used. I estimate that it will probably take another 40 years before this country really doesn't use imperial units anymore.
Personal anecdote: not that long ago, I was describing something to my kids and mentioned a measurement in yards. My children had no idea how long a "yard" was until I described the length with my hands... to which they said "Oh, you mean a metre!" As the measurement I was citing to them was just an estimate anyways, I told them yes... but I told them that a yard was about 3 and a third inches shorter than a metre. I got another blank stare at the word "inch", at which point I told them there is 36 inches in a yard... Suffice to say I was certainly not winning their approval of my archaic measuring technology.
They just shook their heads and said that the metric system is so much better. Personally, I agree... but it's hard to change what you first learn. That's why I give it another 40 years... there's still too many working class adults that are using the imperial system here.
Re:On in the US (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you ever buy soda in two liter bottles?
Cecil Adams pointed out that it's a lot easier to switch than most people think. The way to do it isn't to label everything in both imperial units and metric units; it's to just do it. Instead of labelling each gallon jug of milk with the fact that one gallon = 3.74 liters, thus making the metric system seem comparatively complicated (when in fact, it's less so), the right thing to do is to get rid of gallon jugs and replace them with four liter containers. We see two liter and half-liter soda bottles running around and everyone's fine with it now. Remember a couple of "temperature calibration points" -- water freezes at 0C, 20C = a nice spring day, 34 = Miami in July -- and dealing with the temperature scale change becomes fairly easy. It's trivial when you just do it.
Oh, and as an aside, while you may be very comfortable with miles and pounds and gallons (and, I'd guess, Fahrenheit degrees), how many other imperial units are you comfortable with? Most people aren't familiar with very many. How many people are comfortable with rods, links, chains, bushels, and pecks? How many people understand fluid ounces and ounces of weight (not understand that there's a difference, but what that difference is, and how they're related)? Can you picture an acre in your head fairly accurately? Most people in the U.S. can't, despite the fact that it's the most commonly used unit of land area. For most of us, for most purposes, imperial units are useless because we don't even understand them. One thing that metric units buys you is that the whole thing hangs together, is internally consistent. If any of it makes sense, it all does. I can't visualize an acre, but I can easily visualize a hectare, the corresponding unit of the metric system -- a square that's 100 meters (a little longer than an American football field) on a side.
Just Remember 2.54 (Score:5, Insightful)
It's fairly easy to remember, and everything else regarding length conversions can be derived from it. It also happens to be the official definition of the inch, since NIST uses metric internally.
Re:Just Remember 2.54 (Score:5, Interesting)
For example, if there are 2.2lbs in a kg. Then it's easy enough to use the quick multiply by 11 rule and then multiply by two (or reverse order). So for 52kg it's easy to say that 5 + 2 = 7 so 52*11 = 572 or 52 * 1.1 = 57.2 and 57.2 * 2 = 114.4. So 52kg = 114.4lbs.
As for feet to meters. There are a few quick conversion that aren't of great precision, but accurate enough for day to day life. For example, 3m = 10ft, 1 in. = 2.54cm, 1m = 40in. Of course for precision, I would alway use the 2.54 and a calculator to derive that there are 39.37007874015748031496062992126 inches in a meter. But with the engineering work that I do, it's more typical to simply derive directly the units by converting to and from centimeters and not meters.
As for volume. I of course for quick calculation simply relate the liter to the quart since when it comes to serving drinks, there's not a great deal of difference. When I need precision, it's easy to remember the numbers I've seen on American Coca-Cola bottles my entire life. A 2 liter bottle always says 67.6 fluid ounces on it. This is my base point for conversion since I can deduce that 33.8 fl oz is 1 liter. From there it's all easy.
For temperature, that's a no brainer. 0c is freezing, 100c is boiling. 32F is freezing, 212F is boiling. So 212 - 32 = 180 and 100 - 0 = 100. Therefore it's easy to asume that 180/100 is the ration. That easily converts to 9/5. Compensate for the 32 degree shift on the farenheit side.
After living here for 5.5 years and effectively performing as a calculator for everyone that needs conversions. I can convert the systems with utter ease and simplicity. I have multiple reference points which I can use in order to estimate measures within a 5% margin or error for all human weights and heights. I also can convert distances with ease (after all 60miles = 100km. 100miles = 160km, it's all gravy from there).
So what it boils down to is that if you can get through school in any country without understanding that both systems are just REALLY REALLY simple. Then go back to school and work on it. Let's face it, there's too much stupidity on this planet. If you can remember there's 12 inches in a foot and 8 oz in a cup, then you can remember 3 points of conversion reference and derive the rest.
Oops... almost submitted without adding this to make the stinkin brits happy, first of all, ASE measurement is not imperial although it has much in common. The imperial measure has a different size for the volumetric measure. Instead of 33.8140226 U.S. fl. oz. in the imperial system has 35.1950652 fl. oz. in a liter.
Google is your metric friend (Score:5, Informative)
100Km in feet [google.com]
20 inches in cm [google.com]
Instructions for the Google calculator [google.com]
2.54 cm per inch (Score:5, Informative)
Look at me, I'm Informative!
easy solution (Score:4, Funny)
Quick Estimating (Score:3, Informative)
I also could have carried out the whole conversion, because I know that 1 in = 2.54 cm.
There are a lot of math illiterates. The poster is obviously one of them. I don't think the poster should take any comfort in the fact that other people got the wrong answer as well. I think that (s)he should realize that it's time to become educated.
This is just basic common knowledge that everyone should have.
Quick note.. (Score:5, Informative)
meter
n.
1. The measured arrangement of words in poetry, as by accentual rhythm, syllabic quantity, or the number of syllables in a line.
2. A particular arrangement of words in poetry, such as iambic pentameter, determined by the kind and number of metrical units in a line.
3. The rhythmic pattern of a stanza, determined by the kind and number of lines.
As it pertains to Music:
1. Division into measures or bars.
2. A specific rhythm determined by the number of beats and the time value assigned to each note in a measure.
Of course, this is just me being a nit-picky bastard.
Re:Quick note.. (Score:5, Funny)
Right. I'm going to go to the tyre centre and have them look under the bonnet.
I'll fill my auto with 40 litres of petrol, much less than my neighbour's red-coloured auto which requires 80 litres of petrol. My auto is awful, though, so it's going to the scrapheap. For now, maybe I can bodge something to make my auto look better. At least the two hundred kilogrammes of scrap aluminium are worth something, according to the recycling programme I watched yesterday.
"Of course, this is just me being a nit-picky bastard."
No, it's you not understanding that American English spells things differently from British English.
The accepted American English spellings are "Meter", "Liter", and "Gram".
Re:Quick note.. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Quick note.. (Score:5, Insightful)
I, for won, am exited tu help yu re-rite Inglish literachure, in yore new language. "The Nites Of The Round Tabel" iz so much better than chainjing the pronunsiashun tu "the kuh-nig-hets of the raund tahbluh"
How 'bout we all just calm down and realise that no matter how much you rant about one retarded system being better than another retarded system, English simply has fucked up spelling and that's that?
If you truly do feel passionately that meter is better than metre, then please "use your fucking brain" and start spelling table in a way that's consistent with label (as English and Americans alike pronounce it).
On the topic of units of measurement, please feel free to explain why this "pint" unit is still spelled like mint, hint, dint, lint, tint, vint, glint and any other word ending in 'int'. Yes indeed, the Americans have certainly got this spelling thing all worked out once and for all. Pity the rest of us haven't picked up the fantastic system work they've done.
It's not hard... Use "units" (Score:5, Informative)
Josh
True story.. (Score:5, Funny)
Anyone with half a brain can realise the the problem with making this change, especially in an environment where you're working with existing materials. The following is a genuine conversation I had while out buying some 4 inch guttering:
Me: Hi, I need some 4 inch guttering.
Plumbing shop: Oh sorry, we don't have any 4 inch guttering.
Me: How can you not have any? This sucks!
Plumbing shop: As luck would have it, we do have some 101.6mm guttering that is exactly the same size.
Me: I'll take it!
Another: True story - Irish (Score:5, Funny)
My dad: Good morning, I'd like some quarter inch pipe please
Hardware guy: Ah no surrr, we have the metric system now surr, it's all in millimeters.
My dad: Ok fine, I need some 8mm pipe
Hardware guy: Foine, foine! How many feet would you like?
Yup ... (Score:5, Interesting)
At first i thought this post was stupid (Score:5, Interesting)
This evening, I learned that one meter equals 39.3700787 inches. While this may come as no surprise to some people, it was one to me - for years, I had mistakenly believed a meter was 39.77 inches, and now I know it's basically 39.37.
Of course, I'm not alone in my confusion. A bit of research on Google revealed quite a few different conversions from meters to inches. Here are some of them:
* 38 inches according to a page at Arkansas State University and another at Microflex Technologies.
* 38.16 inches according to a rounding-happy math teacher at Norfolk Collegiate School in Virginia.
* 38.37 inches according to Honeywell's Sensotec folks.
* 38.8 inches according to some numerological babble
* 39 inches according to Fife Products and some folks who sell quilting products.
* 39.14 inches according to the specifications on a measuring wheel for engineers. (uh-oh!)
* 39.15 inches according to an October 30 2002 entry in a blog.
* 39.21 inches according to Richard Bowles.
* 39.27 inches according to pages at University of Wisconsin Stevens Point and the National Optical Astronomy Observatory.
* 39.28 inches according to Jonathan Brooks at Penn State University.
* 39.3 inches according to some laser folks.
* 39.34 inches according to a page about photography, and another about a role-playing game. Hey, it's only a game, their meters can be whatever length they want.
* 39.36 inches according to some ham radio sorts and some NASA folks among others. Pretty close... but... shouldn't NASA know better by now?
* 39.38 inches according to people who race 1-meter model yachts, talk about prehistory in California, and, um, other NASA folks. Again, pretty close!
* 39.39 inches according to someone ranting against metric (how ironic), as well as a page about UFOs.
* 39.4 inches according to a list of conversions from a company that makes electric motors and such things, and the Secretary of the Navy.
* 39.45 inches according to a set of math problems from a university in the Philippines.
* 39.5 inches according to a space.com article on liquid lenses.
* 39.54 inches according to Mark Moburg in this mailing list archive.
* 39.6 inches according to a page about magnetic therapy.
* 39.7 inches according to pages from Des Moines Area Community College and some rounding-happy laser people.
* 39.77 inches according to a page about carpet-weaving in Turkey and another site that sells S-Video Cables and lots of other cables. (See, I wasn't alone!)
* 39.79 inches according to InterlinkBT (now Turck)'s information on DeviceNet Pre-molded Fieldbus cables (below table).
* 39.87 inches, according to a textfile compiling handy (if wrong) conversions for common weights and measures, from O'Reilly.
* 39.97 inches, according to the Science Glossary developed by teachers in the Poughkeepsie (New York) City School District for the 2001-2002 school year, and according to the zoning laws on satellite dishes in Springfield Township, Ohio.
* 40 inches, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Once again, the correct answer is right around 39.37 inches. Remember that - it'll be on the quiz!
Re:At first i thought this post was stupid (Score:5, Informative)
And that looks like a relatively good division, yeah. I tried to get an answer out of Perl using:
which returned: 39.3700787401574814339255681261420249938964843750But Jeff "Bud" Fields did it by hand (which may or may not give better results than asking Perl for lots of precision) and got (quoting him):
I had hoped it'd resolve nicely as it did in Perl, since 2.54 ends with a "4," but unfortunately the factors of 254 are 2 and 127 and 127 had to go be prime on me. Bleah.Forget Metric, Modern Physics! (Score:4, Funny)
My car tops out at about 0.000000231 c
It can travel about 5000000000000 nanometers per tank of gas
and it's engine produces around 937500000000000000000000 electron volts per second at the crank.
It's the wave of the future!
Re:Forget Metric, Modern Physics! (Score:5, Funny)
Firstly the c is redundant. In proper post-Einstein physics, distance and time are the same, so a speed is simply a pure number, so:
My car tops out at about 0.000000231 (or 2.31 x 10^-7)
Now for distance, or time, we need to fix a unit of distance OR time. The most obvious fundamental unit of distance is the Planck length
It can travel about 3 x 10^38 Planck lengths on a tank of gas [ remark -- your car may need maintenance, that's not very far]
Power is energy (aka mass) per unit time, so again, we appeal to Planck and find that your car produces about 4 * 10^-48 Planck masses per Planck time.
Now we've got rid of all the silly arbitrary unit standards and defined everything in terms of the fundamental properties of the universe. Most physical constants are 1 in this model, which is a handy side benefit.
Altitude for plane is usually in feet (Score:5, Interesting)
Arguments against the metric system (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Arguments against the metric system (Score:5, Informative)
The number system is not Arabic. It is Hindu and was transmitted to the west by the Arabs. Please see Hindu-Arabic Numerals [wlv.ac.uk]
NASA (Score:5, Funny)
I worked at NASA back in the early 90s. They had a big campaign to push the metric system, including posters which read "Metric is a Perfect 10!". So I got out my ruler and measured the posters, and found them to be exactly 2 feet by 3 feet...
Re:Poster (Score:4, Informative)
Here in (metric) Europe, the commonly used paper/poster size that comes closest is 59.4 cm by 84.1 cm.
Those numbers don't sound like round numbers in metric, do they?
But it makes sense. The format is known as A1. Its surface area is about 5000 square cm, or half a square meter. A0 is twice as big: a square meter (84.1 cm by 118.9 cm). The ratio of all An formats is sqrt(2), so that the width of An equals the length of A(n+1).
Hence: A4, the standard lettre size, measures 21.0 cm by 29.7 cm; its surface area is 1/16 square meter.
Most poeple... (Score:4, Insightful)
Not to put too much of a point on it, but the rest of the planet doesn't have to give a damn about how many inches there are in a meter, because they don't have inches anymore. Or stones. Or bushles. Or cubits. Or zentner. Or... This is a Yanks-only problem: even the Brits can think in meters, their problem is that they can't spell the word right.
You have two choices, my fellow American friend: Either convert to metric like the rest of the world in the 21th Century, or stop complaining.
As great as Slashdot is, this U.S. bias is getting to be a pain in the ass. It is beyond me why a simple complaint about the known problems of math education in the U.S. makes the front page.
Re:It matters because (Score:3, Informative)
1609 m/mile
39.37 in/m
These are off the top of my head. This guy doesn't know what the conversion rates are, I didn't know how many cubic inches are in a liter which I needed today, so I fucking looked them up. Search on your favorite search engine for conversion factors this isn't news.
Re:It matters because (Score:4, Informative)
Re:It matters because (Score:5, Informative)
And it matters because in the linked blog he gives a long list of incorrect conversion factors from supposedly authoritative sources. I doubt he actually submitted the article; the Slashdot summary just makes him out to be an idiot who can't do simple arithmetic.
Re:It matters because (Score:5, Informative)
Re:It matters because (Score:5, Funny)
Well, I hope your boss doesn't read Slashdot...
Re:It matters because (Score:5, Insightful)
I think I can put a spin on this, though, like so:
"Why yes, I did learn in 2004 that I had been operating with an incorrect conversion factor for going from inches to meters. At that time I researched the extent of use of such incorrect factors, made public my findings, and of course corrected my own notes so as to avoid error in any further calculations.
"By the way, Mr. $BOSSNAME, I notice that $COMPANY's web site currently states that a meter is $INCORRECTNUM inches..."
Shouldn't be a problem at all, you see? And if that doesn't work, I can always say, "Look, at least I've realized I was wrong and found the right answer, unlike these teachers, professors, rocket scientists, engineers..." :)
Re:It matters because (Score:4, Insightful)
Good for you. (No sarcasm intended.) But in my personal experience, admitting errors never evokes respect (no matter what your Sunday School teacher might have told you) and pointing out mistakes your boss has made is a mark against you, the more so if it's of the "potatoe" style obvious-to-a-schoolchild one.
Re:It matters because (Score:5, Funny)
It doesn't matter who you are... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:It matters because (Score:5, Informative)
There is, in fact, no Birchall in administration at NASA, and as far as I can find, there is no Birchall associated with NASA.
The program director of NASA's Mars program is Scott Hubbard. http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/newsroom/pressreleases/00 -10-26.html [nasa.gov]
(search for mars program director)
Re:It matters because (Score:5, Informative)
This may, or may not, prove or disprove that I am the "right" Dan Birchall.
Metadiscussion is great.
Re:It matters because--"right" Dan Birchall (Score:5, Funny)
*No, really, honest.
Re:It matters because (Score:3, Funny)
Because it takes longer than seven days to reach Mars?
Re:Why? (Score:3, Funny)
Who controls the british crown?
Who keeps the metric system down?
We dooo! We dooo!
Re:Why? (Score:3, Insightful)
No compelling reason to change. Same reason why we don't use 220 volts as wall current.
Re:Why? (Score:4, Interesting)
No, it's so that after we conquor you, we can plague you with so many little things you have to learn to adapt to your new overlords that you won't have time to even remember what your nationality was before we took over.
Er, I think, anyway.
Seriously, I think it's just part of good ol' American laze. I worked hard to learn the metric system and to be able to convert imperial units to metric when I was in school under the false belief that we'd be completely switched over by the time I grew up. After I grew up (arguably so, anyway), I forgot all that. Now I can't convert shit even in Imperial. How many cups are in a quart, again? How about teaspoons in a tablespoon? I think it's 3. And no matter how many times I cut up a stick of butter, I still can't remember the tablespoon -> cup conversion. :(
Re:Why? (Score:5, Informative)
This is a popular misconception. The fact is, the U.S. does use the metric system. See here for a list of laws [colostate.edu].
Re:Why? (Score:5, Interesting)
Its benefits are over-rated. Is it some badge of honour to continue to use an outdated, more complicated system of measurement?
10 is divisible by 2 and 5. 12 is divisible by 2, 3, 4, and 6. This makes mental division twice as easy with feet than with meters. To my mind that's a good reason to stick with Imperial for all but scientific purposes (where we've already been using metric for decades.)
Also, we've gotten screwed from previous times the government has tried to force it on us. 1.75 liters of whiskey is a nontrivial amount less than a handle of whiskey.
Re:Legacy Measurement System (Score:5, Funny)
The scale measured in Kg and I was able to say, "whoa! that's X pounds!"
Your kid only weighs X pounds? Sorry to hear that. My 10 month old baby boy is weighing in right about XXX pounds right now. And he's starting to walk!
Hmmmm, am I the only one left using Roman numbers? I guess if I'm gonna use this metric thing I'm going to have to upgrade to Arabic numbers, eh? Nah, it would cost too much.
Re:Legacy Measurement System (Score:4, Insightful)
I personally grew up working on American cars (GM, Ford, Dodge) and using the "standard" measurement system exclusively. As I got into engineering-related areas, I've found it necessary to learn the Metric system, and the appropriate conversions.
As well, I've gotten to like foreign cars (Toyota specifically -- you can't kill them!), and I think you'll find most auto mechanics -- and I am not one -- easily capable of converting millimeters to fractions of an inch. Regardless of their normal mathematical skills, by association and eventual familiarity, these things are easily picked up. Not to mention, most American cars I've worked on recently seem to use either all metric or -- worse -- a combination of standards (too often the engine is Japanese while the rest is American...)
But the point of that was that the conversions aren't difficult, and (despite what many non-US people tend to imply) Americans are perfectly capable of learning to convert, or learning a new system of measurement.
It's not lack of intelligence or lack of will, but lack of necessity, that keeps most US citizens from converting. We all realize that 100 km == 60 miles, if only because of the jokes commedians make about driving into Canada and seeing a speed limit sign of 100. Plus most cars sold here display speed in both measurements, though admittedly the km portion is usually much less prominant...
Granted, if the US government mandates the use of metric units, we'd have the necessary push. However, I suspect many would oppose a conversion being required by law in this country if it isn't shown to be absolutely necessary.
In the public (non-government) area, it becomes a "chicken vs egg" scenerio. No lumber yard is going to sell lumber measured exclusively in metric units, and no building contractor is going to ask for several 79mm X 157mm X 244cm boards to build a wall when 2x4x8' is the standard of measurement here in the US for such materials (I'm not sure my conversions were correct there btw).
Anyway, it's not a stupidity or laziness factor as many non-US people assume, rather it's that our current system is very much established and ingrained into our society that it's difficult to change without making laws to require the change, which most citizens would disagree is all that necessary. In engineering fields, it's a different story, and if you're an engineer you likely should know both systems (since you will likely deal with both). Even in electronics, some standard measurements are in "mils" (thousandths of an inch) while others are in millimeters...
Anyway I'm just ranting because I'm still awake for some odd reason.
BTW, this was not directed at the parent; the Honda/metric comment just inspired me to rant for a bit
Re:(north) American cousins - get on board (Score:5, Funny)
How would it make you better off in Australia? Do you have to keep spare sets of measuring spoons or something around for when we come over to visit?
Rods to the hogshead (Score:4, Funny)
It's "40 rods to the hogshead", actually. A "rod" is 16.5 feet; a "hogshead" is 63 gallons. Consequently, the elder Mr. Simpson's car putatively ran at 0.002 mpg.
Re:American bashing? (Score:5, Informative)
Using prefixes to express multiples of base units?
No memorizing antiquated and imprecise ratios?
You have a base unit for every type of measurement; length(m), mass(g), weight(N), pressure(Pa), energy (J), etc. Just add prefixes and numerical values and you're all set! So easy..
Re:American bashing? (Score:5, Insightful)
The only appropriate base system for units of measure is that of the number system they will be used in.
We work in decimal - base 10.
You arguments are a red herring, they are arguments for us adopt a number system that is base 12 system (which incidently, imperial is not) over the base 10 one we use at the moment, not arguments to have your metrics in a different base to the one they are used in.
In the computer world we work in binary instead of decimal, and relevent computer metrics are base 2 rather than base 10 because of this. Having 12 bits in a byte, 3 bytes in a word and 1760 words in a kb (or whatever) would just be daft, exactly as daft as the imperial system infact.
Also, using an imperial measure of angles to justify the imperial system is a bit circular.
I highly doubt this webpage. (Score:5, Insightful)
Did you ever think that if you grew up in a metric environment, you'd have as much of a troubled time thinking in imperial? The website you linked to didn't think that. After all, naturally you'd be more adept at doing 3 and 3 times stuff in your head if you'd been doing it for all your unit conversion in your life! I've been doing metric in my head, as Canada is not silly like the brits (a brit whose site you link to) who don't sell things by the litre, or measure by the kilometre, or use kilograms as their unit of mass. British people are metric in name only: underneath, the sickening heart of ugly imperial units beats away.
Converting non-metric units in my head is hard, and I usually end up likening it to the ratio out of 10 because that's how I grew up. 5/16ths? Thas' really close to 4/16ths, which is 1/4th which is a weensy bit more than 0.25, so this must be smaller than the 1/2th one which is really 0.50. I don't convert the 16ths and 2ths to a base denominator, I convert them in terms of a 0 to 1.
The kooky site you link to is all about how counting in base-12 is the way to go [orbix.co.uk]. I mean, you can take a step back to the way Germanic tribes did it, but I think base-10 is the way to go. Metric's just an outgrowth of it. Imperial units were an outgrowth of kooky base-12 that was used by Germanic tribes -- it's why English uses eleven and twelve instead of oneteen and twoteen. Japanese people don't have this problem -- the go ju-ich, ju-ni, ju-san. Their problem is about 4s and 7s and 9s. Yon or shi? Shi means death! Shichi or nana? Nana is usually used for numbers only. Ku or kyu?
Re:I highly doubt this webpage. (Score:4, Informative)
"Imperial units were an outgrowth of kooky base-12 that was used by Germanic tribes -- it's why English uses eleven and twelve instead of oneteen and twoteen."
Oh dear, when are we going to get a "-1 complete made-up bullshit" modifier? Here are some facts.
1. In the first place, with 16 ounces to the pound, 14 pounds to the stone and 3 feet to the yard, it's perfectly clear that the imperial system is not a pure base-12 system anyway.
2. The "imperial" system was not Germanic in origin. The metric system was invented in the 18th century. Before that, every country in Europe used a variant of the "imperial" system, which is descended from the Roman system of measurements. They're the folk that came up with 12 inches to the foot, 16 ounces to the pound etc.
3. Given that these units are Roman in origin, note that in latin, 11 is "undecim" (i.e. one-ten) and twelve is "duodecim" (two-ten). So clearly, language has nothing to do with it. And incidently, "eleven" comes from the Old English expression for "one left over (from ten)", so even the Germanic tribes counted in decimal.
4. Use of base-12 systems long predates even the Romans. The 12-hour clock and 360-degree system for angles were developed by the Babylonians several thousand years ago.
5. Then again, if you need to convert 5/16 to decimal to figure out that it's more than a quarter and less than a half, you're probably beyond my ability to help.
Re:It's not just that the poster is a moron (Score:5, Insightful)
This advantage is real, but it's in no way enough to even begin to compensate for all the other advantages of metric.
I could give a long list of advantages, but instead I'll say this;
To accelerate 1kg by 1m/s you need a force of 1N. If you push with a force of 1N over a distance of 1m you've used 1joule. If you did this in 1s then your power is 1watt. If you prefer to have an electric motor doing this work for you, it can produce this 1watt by drawing, for example, 1A at 1V. For 1A to flow at a volate of 1V, this means your motor will have an internal resistance equal to 1ohm
Now you repeat that, in imperial units.
Re:It's not just that the poster is a moron (Score:3, Insightful)
Right. Which shows that for science and engineering, metric is the way to go. Jumping from that to saying we
Re:It's not just that the poster is a moron (Score:5, Funny)
You should see the calculating skills of the rebel cooks.
Re:It's not just that the poster is a moron (Score:5, Funny)
Promoting base 12 (Score:4, Interesting)
Interestingly, there are at least a couple of groups that are trying [orbix.co.uk] to promote [sunynassau.edu] the use of base 12 over base 10 for exactly this reason.
Re:Reason for Imperial units (Score:5, Insightful)
Obviously you would find it difficult to use metric if all the products you are using are made with imperial measurements that are "nice" numbers. Just bear in mind that other peoples products come with "nice" metric measurements.
Also, I prefer metric becasue I was born after it was adopted and it's all I know, certainly. But it does seem that if everything is ten more than the previous level it's a lot more consistent than imperial where the number of x's in y differs depending on what type of measurement you're talking about.